From: jsiek_at_[hidden]
Date: 2000-06-14 11:09:08
David Abrahams writes:
> Sheesh. No offense, but that sounds more complicated than it's worth.
> If someone needs extended categorization they can define an
> extended_iterator_tag, no?
If I understand what you mean, that's what I'm trying to
accommodate... the "my_iterator_tag" was one of these extended
categories, and I need too be able to figure out which of the standard
categories is its base class, so I can pick the right adaptor class
for it.
I agree, things are getting a bit complicated :) I've got some ideas
for how to simplify the code...
Cheers,
Jeremy